In DRC,
Ladsous Spins
RFI On Others'
Past, Not
Asked Of His
Own
By
Matthew
Russell Lee,
Exclusive
series
UNITED
NATIONS, April
24 --The April
22
announcement
by the UN
mission in the
DR Congo that
UN
Peacekeeping
chief Herve
Ladsous is in
the DRC
inevitably
brings up
history,
twenty one
years ago and
this year.
But these
inevitable
questions were
avoided by
Ladsous, not
only in UN
Headquarters
and in a
staged
interview with
the UN's own
Radio Okapi,
but now also
on Radio
France
International
(RFI).
There, as to WHY
Ladsous
blocked UN
participation
in military
operations
against the
Hutu FDLR
despite giving
a waiver for
operations
against the
Lord's
Resistance
Army, he was
not asked
about his own
history with
the Hutu
genocidaires
in 1994 - an
obvious
question, but
not for RFI,
it seems.
Ladsous
pontificated
about about
the past
records of two
Congolese
military
officials but
was not asked
about his own
history. Noblesse
oblige.
Meanwhile in
New York, in
the UN staff
of DPKO told
Inner City
Press Ladsous
would accomplish
nothing in the
DRC -- "by
design," one
staffer put it
- and that he
should resign.
Across First
Avenue from
the UN at IPI,
a session
about UN
reform turned
to the
appointment
without merit
of P3 deadwood
to USG
position - Ladsous was
the elephant
in the room.
One of
Ladsous'
former
spokespeople,
who carried
out his
mandate of
blocking all
critical Press
questions,
stood there
awkwardly.
Ladsous is
hurting UN
staff, a whole
Department and
more --- whole
countries, due
to
colonialism.
UN
improvement,
or continued
decay, is in
the balance.
Watch this
site.
Radio
Okapi, which
the Free UN
Coalition for
Access has
always said
has some good
and energetic
reporters, was
debased into
“interviewing”
its boss
Ladsous
without for
example asking
about this
history with
the Hutu
militia that
became the
FDLR, nor now
his rejection
of an
invitation to
a “Protection
of Civilians”
event in
Rwanda.
Instead
Ladsous on his
Okapi
pontificated
about the rule
of law - and
is not asked
why his
Department
Peacekeeping
Operations
waived its
supposed rules
to participate
in military
operations
against the
Lord's
Resistance
Army but not
the FDLR. This
is a new low.
And here is
new exclusive
reporting by
Inner City
Press, from
the DPKO that
Ladsous has
been
destroying in
New York:
multiple
sources
describe to
Inner City
Press how long
time power in
DPKO Meg Carey
is now out,
with no public
explanation -
again, like in
some of the
“regimes” the
UN
pontificates
again.
And similarly,
Ladsous' scribes
who have neglected
reporting that
this Emperor
has no clothes
have not
reported that
Meg Carey, who
helped
spoon-feed
them, is out.
We'll have
more on this.
Inner
City Press:
Well, on the
Democratic
Republic of
the Congo and
Under-Secretary-General
[Hervé]
Ladsous. I saw
in the MONUSCO
[United
Nations
Organization
Stabilization
Mission in the
Democratic
Republic of
the Congo]
press
conference
they did today
that he's
there, they
said, for five
days.
Can you
confirm
that?
And what is…
is trying to
get the UN
active against
the FDLR
[Democratic
Forces for the
Liberation of
Rwanda] one of
the
goals?
And relatedly
or not, I
wanted you to
just confirm
either here or
maybe later
today that Mr.
Ladsous
rejected an
invitation
from Rwanda to
attend a
protection of
civilians
event in
Rwanda.
Spokesman
Dujarric:
I don't have
anything on
the latter
part.
And Mr.
Ladsous is
indeed in
Kinshasa where
he's obviously
having
discussions on
one of the
UN's largest
peacekeeping
operations.
While the UN
Spokesperson''s
Office and
DPKO have not
answered about
Ladsous'
rejection of
Rwanda's
invitation,
sources in
DPKO, along
with telling
Inner City
Press, how
Ladsous has
inappropriately
personalized
everything in
the
Department,
say now he may
sent Edmond
Mulet in his
place. Seems
he sure can't
sent Meg Carey
any
more. We'll
have more on
this.
In 1994
Ladsous argued
for the escape
of Hutu
genocidaires
into eastern
Congo; this
year he
blocked UN
participation
in military
operations
against their
successors the
FDLR. Ladsous
refused to
waive a stated
rule which WAS
waived to
fight the LRA.
Now Inner City
Press can
exclusively
report that
Ladsous has
refused to
attend a high
level
"Protection of
Civilians"
event in
Rwanda in
May. His
reason, made
known to
diplomats?
Rwanda has,
Ladsous
hautily
believes, been
rude to him.
This is how
the UN allows
Ladsous to
operate - he
can refuse to
answer
questions from
media which
asks about
this history;
now he can
refuse
invitations
from and talk
badly about a
member state
like Rwanda.
Here's what
his MONUSCO
says about
Ladsous' visit
to the DRC:
"Le
Secrétaire
général
adjoint des
Nations Unies
chargé des
Operations de
maintien de la
paix,Hervé
Ladsous, est
arrivé à
Kinshasa le 21
avril 2015. Au
cours de sa
visite de cinq
jours,
monsieur
Ladsous se
rendra à Goma
et à Bukavu. A
Kinshasa, il
rencontrera
les membres du
gouvernement
congolais et
le Président
de la
République."
We'll haver
more on this.
Twenty one
years after
the beginning
of the
genocide in
Rwanda, UN
Peacekeeping
remains under
the thumb of
Herve Ladsous,
who in 1994
acting as
France's
Ambassador in
the UN
Security
Council argued
for the escape
of the Hutu
genocidaires
into Eastern
Congo. See Ladsous'
memo here, put
online by
Inner City
Press. On
April 7, the
French
Presidency
said it would
declassify
some
documents. But
will those
like Ladsous',
and more, be
released? Why?
Notably,
Ladsous has
banned UN
support to a
military
offensive to
“neutralize”
the heirs of
the genocide,
the Hutu FDLR
militia.
Ladsous
refuses Press
questions on
this -- so on
April 7 Inner
City Press asked UN Spokesman
Stephane
Dujarric,
transcribe
here, video here:
Inner
City Press: A
follow-up on
this question
of the
twenty-first
anniversary of
the Rwanda
genocide.
I saw the
statement by
the Special
Envoy in the
Great Lakes,
Said Djinnit,
basically
saying the
FDLR [Forces
Democratiques
de Liberation
du Rwanda]
should be
defeated.
What can you
say about the
seeming
contradiction,
despite these
various
statements of
how important
it is to
eliminate the
FDLR, the
decision
relatively at
the last
minute by
MONUSCO
[United
Nations
Organization
Stabilization
Mission in the
Democratic
Republic of
the Congo] or
the Force
Intervention
Brigade and
DPKO [Ladsous'
Department of
Peacekeeping
Operations]
not to
participate
against the
FDLR?
And does it
make it less
likely they,
in fact, will
be defeated
and will
continue?
Spokesman
Dujarric:
I think
MONUSCO and
our
peacekeeping
colleagues
have very good
reasons not to
participate in
that… in
that.
This is an
issue that the
Congolese
Government
also needs to
deal
with.
And I think we
had good
reasons not to
participate.
Inner City
Press:
The reason I'm
asking about
the
contradictions
is it seems
this same
human rights
due diligence
policy was
explicitly
waived in the
case of
pursuing the
Lord's
Resistance
Army and was,
at least in
some people's
mind,
seemingly
waived or
delayed in the
case of the
Minova
rapes.
So it seems
for this to be
the one
invocation of
it as regards
to the group
that's
basically the
successor to
the
genocidaires.
Spokesman:
I think you
and I can
agree to have
different
views on this
This too:
Ladous has
twice had his
spokesmen
physically
remove the
UNTV
microphone
from Inner
City Press,
which asked.
On
April 6 it was
claimed that
Ladsous'
spokesman was
pointing to
another
journalist as
Ladsous
refused to
answer
Inner City
Press'
questions -
but he grabbed
the
microphone, as
happened
before, here.
Among
documents put
online on
April 6, 2015
was the Mucyo
Commission
report,
which says of
the Security
Council
advocacy
involving
Ladsous that
in the
Security
Council, the
French
Ambassador
“did a lot of
lobbying with
the the Member
States of the
Council to
avoid the
Security
Council's use
of the
expression
'genocide.'”
Page 179, here.
But the
documents
released jump
from June 1994
to 1998, thus
missing this
Ladsous memo.
Pre-selected
coverage,
focused on US
Bill Clinton,
John Shattuck,
Prudence
Bushnell and
Joyce Leader
and UK David
Hannay, omits
this link to
current events
at the UN as
well. We'll
have more on
this.
When
today's UN
Peacekeepers
are
determined, by
the UN itself,
to have shot
at civilians
by using
inappropriate
force, what
accountability
is there?
None, with
Herve Ladsous
atop UN
Peacekeeping.
But even the
supposed
reporting in
the incidents
is
inconsistent.
On Mali, after
Ladsous'
MINUSMA
reached side
deals with the
MNLA rebels
about
Tabankort,
there was a
protest in
Gao.
UN Police
ultimately
under Ladsous'
command shot
and killed
three
civilians. In
this case,
because the
Malian
government
wanted an
investigation
of the killing
of protesters
which
supported its
positition,
the UN did an
investigation
and at least
released a
summary. (Ladsous
refused to
answer
Inner City
Press'
questions
including
about the
roots of the
protest, his
mission's deal
with the MNLA
in Tabankort.)
Vine
here.
These
questions took
place at the
UN Security
Council
stakeout, but
Reuters
and Agence
France Presse
did not
mention it,
only blaming
Rwanda. Both
previously
tried to
censor Inner
City Press
coverage of
Ladsous and
French
colonialism,
to the extent
of moving to
ask the UN to
throw Inner
City Press
out.
Which
approach is
journalism?
AFP
wasn't even AT
this stakeout
- Ladous
sought to
avoid
questions by
repeating his
talking points
in French, but
no AFP. Then
Reuters told
UNTV to give
it the
microphone, to
ask about
Rwanda.
Ladsous
leered. Then a
retired
Reuters
reporter was
pointed at by
Ladsous'
spokesman Nick
Birnback, who
then grabbed
the UNTV
microphone to
take it away
from Inner
City Press.
On April 2
Ladsous
appeared at
the UN
Security
Council media
stakeout but
after reading
a prepared
statement
refused to
answer Press
questions
about the
underlying
Tabankort
agreement with
the MNLA which
led to the
Mali shooting.
Video
I here.
Inner City
Press also
asked about
shooting at
civilians by
Ladsous'
peacekeepers
in Haiti,
caught on
video, and
asked if that
withheld
report would
be released.
Ladsous said,
I do not
respond to
you. Video
II here.
Inner City
Press asked if
it isn't now a
pattern,
peacekeepers
shooting at
unarmed
civilians not
only in Mali
but also
Haiti, and if
Ladsous will
take
responsibility.
Ladsous'
spokesman
Nicholas
Birnback then
grabbed the
UNTV
microphone and
moved it away
from Inner
City Press.
This happened
before with
Ladsous and
his previous
spokesman. Video here, story
here. At
that time,
after the Free UN Coalition for Access
complained,
the UN
Spokesperson
told FUNCA it
would not
happen again.
Now it has.
Accountability?
Tellingly,
the Ladsous
scribe who
angled for and
got the first
question asked
pointedly if
the
peacekeepers
in Mali
weren't from
Rwanda.
Ladsous leered
and said the
Troop
Contributing
Country, then
spoke again at
the end to lay
the blame on
them. Video
II, here, near
end.
In the public
record is Ladsous'
1994 memo
supporting the
escape of the
Hutu
genocidaires
who formed the
FDLR into
Eastern Congo,
where now
Ladsous'
MONUSCO finds
one excuse
after another
NOT
to neutralize
the FDLR
as it did the
largely Tutsi
M23 armed
group.
Inner City
Press, which
has been
asking the UN
Spokesperson -
since UN
Peacekeeping
chief Herve
Ladsous
refuses Press
questions
-- about the
killings since
they occurred
in January, on
April 2 asked
UN
spokesperson
Farhan Haq if
the report
will be made
public, and if
any verdict or
sentence
against the
peacekeepers
would be made
public. Haq
did not say
yes to either.
A report on
Ladsous'
peacekeepers
in Haiti
firing at
unarmed
demonstrators
hasn't even
been
summarized,
much less
released.
As to
the killings
by
peacekeepers
in Gao, Haq
would not even
publicly state
the
nationality of
the
peacekeepers.
Talk about
impunity. He
said the
Ladsous will
briefing the
Security
Council --
behind closed
doors, of
course --
about the
report, then
will come to
the UNTV
stakeout. But
Ladsous
refuses Press
questions, on
his cover up
of rapes in DR
Congo and
Darfur and
every other
question. Video here, Vine
here.
This
is a new low
in
UNaccountability.
Here
is the UN's
summary as
read-out by
Haq, video to
follow:
The
Inquiry
launched by
the
Secretary-General
to determine
the facts
surrounding
the violent
demonstration
that took
place on 27
January 2015
in Gao, Mali,
in front of
the United
Nations
Multidimensional
Integrated
Stabilisation
Mission in
Mali (MINUSMA)
Regional
Headquarters
has submitted
its report.
The Inquiry
determined
that members
of a MINUSMA
Formed Police
Unit used
unauthorized
and excessive
force on
civilian
protesters
during the
demonstration,
resulting in
the death by
gunfire of
three
protesters and
the wounding
of four
others.
The Inquiry
also
established
that some
protesters and
organisers of
the
demonstration
bear
responsibility
for the
violence of
the protest,
which included
Molotov
cocktails,
stone throwing
and attempts
to breach the
perimeter of
the Regional
MINUSMA
Headquarters
in Gao. The
Inquiry noted
that MINUSMA
security
forces were
left to face
the protesters
on their own
in violation
of the Status
of Forces
Agreement with
the host
country. Five
MINUSMA police
officers were
wounded during
the event.
The
Secretary-General
profoundly
regrets the
casualties
among
civilians
resulting from
the excessive
use of force
during this
event by the
MINUSMA
personnel
concerned.
He condemns it
as a violation
of the MINUSMA
Directive on
the Use of
Force. The
Secretary-General
is committed
to ensuring
that the
responsible
individuals
are held fully
accountable
for their
actions.
Steps are
being taken in
this regard
with the
authorities of
Mali and the
relevant
police-contributing
country. The
Secretary-General
encourages the
Government of
Mali to take
the
appropriate
steps to
prevent future
such
incidents.
Communications,
management and
crisis
procedures
within MINUSMA
will also be
examined to
prevent the
recurrence of
such acts.
The
Secretary-General
is committed
to ensuring
justice for
the victims
and their
families
according to
local customs
and
appropriate
United Nations
procedures.
MINUSMA is in
contact with
the local
authorities
and with the
individuals
and families
concerned in
this regard.
On behalf of
the United
Nations, the
Secretary-General
expresses his
deepest
apologies to
the victims
and their
families.
The United
Nations, and
MINUSMA in
particular,
remain
committed to
supporting the
stabilisation
of Mali.